Star hurdler Liz Palmer given 3 1/2-year USADA doping suspension
Liz writes:
This is one of the hardest yet most freeing letters I’ve ever written.
I had a positive result for an anabolic substance when I was tested at the Masters Indoor Championships in Albuquerque. The substance was a metabolite of Dianabol, which is one of the most masculinizing substances among steroids.
Users of Dianabol will have large gains of mass and water retention — up to 20 pounds in a month. Women should never take this substance due to the damaging masculinizing factors. Dianabol is contraindicative to anyone who has a genetic disposition toward breast cancer as I do since it increases the risk factors for such. It aromatizes, or turns into estrogen in the body and estrogen is a trigger for breast cancer.
The level of the metabolite in my urine was labeled by the lab as “low” — 2 nanograms per milliliter is the level per WADA standards that can trigger a “low” adverse result. To put this in perspective, a nanogram per milliliter is a “part per billion.” So the threshold for a “low” result is 2 parts per billion.
One part per billion is equivalent to one drop of water in an average backyard swimming pool. The average cell in the human body weighs a single nanogram. That illustrates the minuscule amount of metabolite that was in my system, yet WADA’s strict liability policy gives no latitude for levels of detection – it’s only a binary result, positive or negative.
Before this season began, I had confided to friends that, for several reasons, this was going to be my last year as a competitive athlete in masters track and field. I could no longer justify competing when I weighed it against other factors, most importantly my health.
To find that I tested positive for a health-adverse banned substance when in the past I had purposely avoided taking beneficial risk-reduction breast cancer medications (due to them being banned) is irony beyond belief.
I would never knowingly take a substance that would compromise my health and femininity, and I had no changes in my appearance or in the results of my regularly scheduled blood tests that would have tipped me off that something was amiss. I was also worried sick about the possibility that I may have increased my breast cancer chances due to the aromatizing effects of Dianabol.
I can’t tell you how badly this affected me – I honestly lay awake at night worrying about it.
The timing of any systematic doping for me was unsupported due to foot surgery I had in November along with my nine-week recovery time. I could not begin sprinting and track training until the middle of January.
To follow a typical cycle, I would have needed to start my deliberate doping approximately one week after my foot surgery in November, continue it while I was in a walking boot or a brace for the next six weeks, keep doping while I was in physical therapy and unable to sprint or train until the second week of January, and then stop right at that time in order to give the Dianabol the necessary 6-7 weeks clearance time before any testing.
There’s no advantage to doping if you are mobility-restricted after surgery. I was able to jog in the pool and lift weights for my upper body starting in December, but there was no sprint training. I couldn’t train until mid-January per doctor’s orders.
I presented this logic to USADA and noted the possibility of contamination of one of the amino acid supplements I began taking in January and stopped about two weeks before the competition since I had no other source by which the substance would have entered my body.
Several studies have suggested that up to 25% of supplements may be contaminated with substances that will trigger a positive drug test. The levels of contamination can be too low to be detected using routine product screening methods but high enough to trigger a positive urinalysis test.
I have taken supplements for years but have always checked their ingredients against the Global DRO online lookup tool to see if any were banned substances. What I didn’t do is research the companies. One parent company that supplied my products is based outside of the U.S. and uses raw materials sourced overseas. Their website specifically mentioned a partnership with a location in China, which is a popular source for Dianabol production.
The company also had two situations involving athletes (one a U.S. bobsledder, one an NFL player) who had positive drug tests. Both athletes used products produced by the company and testing by an independent lab proved the products were contaminated with an anabolic steroid.
If I had done this research, I would have quickly decided that this company was too risky. Unfortunately, I didn’t do this. I also didn’t have the empty bottles to obtain the lot number in order to submit them to an independent lab for testing. USADA told me of this option, which is very expensive and the cost is borne by the athlete. But since I didn’t have the lot number, I was unable to use this testing to prove the contamination.
I released all my medical records and other supporting documentation to USADA. After reviewing everything, their legal counsel told me they decided to do something on my behalf – they purchased my supplements and tested them — all at USADA expense. They even made a trip to a retail store to buy one of them since it wasn’t available online.
The legal counsel said, “This is definitely not something that we usually do,” but my medical records showed them that systematic doping was unlikely.
The difficulty was without a lot number the chance of obtaining the same contaminated lot number for either supplement consumed over six months ago was very very small. But even with this small chance, they still went ahead and did this at their own expense in order to assist with my case.
Sadly, the lot numbers weren’t a match and neither supplement sample showed contamination. USADA then said they would take my medical records and petition WADA for a reduction in suspension. USADA operates under the WADA code, which is very restrictive as to reductions, but USADA still lobbied on my behalf for a reduction.
WADA agreed with USADA and gave me a 6-month reduction in the length of my 4-year suspension which began March 5, 2016.
So that was the hard part. Now for the freeing part. If my doctor recommends medications, I can take them without worrying if they are banned or not. They are necessary for my health. This gives me great peace of mind.
I don’t want any part of the finger-pointing and witch hunt mentality that accompanies news like this and I won’t access Masterstrack.com to read the comments when Ken posts his article about me.
People close to me have given me their unconditional support. USADA supported my lack of intent to the point that they volunteered to bear the cost of expensive testing even with the small possibility of positive evidence. WADA agreed to a suspension reduction after reviewing all elements of my case.
Regarding the negative comments or questions about my sincerity, it’s said that the best thing about the worst time in your life is that you get to see people’s true opinions of you, not what they have shown to your face. I’ve beat myself up so badly over this to the point that I’ve had enough – I’m so weary of allowing this to make me feel like an evil person. I did that for a while and all it accomplished was to make me cry and cry and lose sleep.
I would lie awake and wonder if I was being punished somehow, why this happened, etc. It was exhausting and pointless. I’m not doing it any longer. I can’t control what others think about me, but I can control how I feel about myself. The support of my friends has made this bearable.
So what will I do now? Quite simply, I’ll live my life. There’s a lot going on besides masters track and field. For now at least, I plan on going “dark” on social media for a while. I need some time to let this whole thing heal.
Just because a negative has entered your life doesn’t mean that you are barred from any future positive outcomes and situations. In time, this negative will fade and the positives will multiply. I look forward to the future.
So except for this very last part, it’s been fun.
USADA has yet to release information on Liz’s case. I will add that when done. I’ve written to people for reactions and comment, including members of her club, the Southern California Striders, whose Greg Pizza also is serving a USADA suspension.
157 Responses
Peter L. Taylor - August 3, 2016
Thank you very much, Liz, for preparing this statement and allowing Ken to post it. As a friend of yours I know that this has been extremely hard for you.
I also know that you are very much aware of your personal risk for breast cancer and would never knowingly do anything (or ingest anything) that would increase that risk.
I wish you all the best, Liz.
Peter Taylor
Mike Sullivan - August 3, 2016
Liz Palmer.
You and only you knows the truth……Who cares what others think, say about you …I would love to see you return if your health allows it…..The way you compete has always inspired me!!! ..and I would venture many others….
I too wish you the best….
Mike Sullivan
Terry Parks - August 3, 2016
Wow. This is a shocker. 3 1/2 years is a long time. It will be sad to see you retire in this way, but one’s health has to be the first concern.
All the best.
Terry
whowouldbeyourdaddy - August 3, 2016
Wow. Just a thought……maybe people in her situation should be allowed to compete…..but not obtain a medal. I’d hate to have to wait 3 plus years. I don’t know Liz….but I’d tell her to go ahead and look at social media. She’ll find out real fast who her friends are. I’d also tell her to ignore any negativity.
dave albo - August 3, 2016
This punishment is probably similar to what Russia will get for systematic state sponsored doping with the intent of cheating others out of medals and reducing their incomes. Unfortunately you can measure chemicals, but not intent. I am very confident this was not intentional. Disclaimer: Liz is a friend.
There is something kind of odd about all of this. For youngish masters it might makes sense to do testing, but at some point you become so old that being able to compete at all, no matter how, is a real blessing, and nobody cares what your performance is, and I’d argue no one SHOULD care what you are taking. In between age 40 and age 90 is a really big grey area in which, it seems, one by one, we are losing our finest to this drug thing.
Faced with health or compete, choose one, friends are getting snatched away, leaving the (for now) fortunate ones. All in the context of decreasing participation #s.
Liz brought a lot to the Colorado regional meets she attended… energy, warmth, excitement, and of course high level performances that contributed to the success of the meet. To lose Liz is a real loss to the sport.
Thames - August 3, 2016
Much better than the previous “I wasn’t cheating, I was just trying to chemically reverse my aging process”.
annon - August 3, 2016
I have been tested and passed and I can’t agree that we shouldn’t care if anyone is taking anything between the ages of 40 and 90… men or women its unfair to be able to take something to help you if everyone is not taking it. Part of this sport is getting to be in your best fitness to race at the right moment. So much depends on that and so much can change it that adding the possibility that someone has a drug induced advantage (and even could afford to buy services someone else cannot afford for instance) seems totally unfair. There have been claims of contaminated supplements before, but many products say “NSF” and they are easy to buy find and buy. I only buy NSF products. I am not accusing anyone of anything intentional, I’m sorry this has happened to Liz. I am only responding to the statement that we should not care, I could not disagree more. Respectfully.
Rob Jerome - August 3, 2016
Very well put, Dave. And the contamination of non-banned substances by banned substances during the manufacturing process, as is the case here, is a real problem.
Every time someone is banned, there is much discussion but no real answers. To lose someone like Liz is a tragedy.
Mke Travers - August 3, 2016
Who says that contamination of non banned substances with banned substances is a problem? This excuse is almost always trotted out by athletes who get caught. This is the “go to” rationale. Its convenient ’cause no one can disprove it.
At least Greg Piazza had the good sense to admit what he did.
Tragedy? I think not. There are lots of tragedies in the world. Self administered steroids is not one of them.
Mike
Daphne Sluys - August 3, 2016
This is very sad news indeed for Liz and for our small T & F community. As a woman and one of Liz’s friends and competitors, I know with 100% conviction that Liz would NEVER knowingly ingest anything that increased her risk of breast cancer. Contaminated products do exist unfortunately, in all areas of our lives. Lesson for every one of us who takes any kind of supplement: research companies and store samples in actual containers in case you ever find yourself in Liz’s shoes.
Daphne Sluys - August 3, 2016
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18563865
Link is to a scientific study about contaminated nutritional supplements.
Travers #7… at least read the abstract of this study before you leap to judgement; it might also save your own skin, unless you take zero vitamins etc.
Matthew Thomas - August 3, 2016
That’s a curious response Mike Tavers. I’d love to see what you would have to say to defend yourself if you tested positive for something you did not knowingly take and for which you have absolutely no explanation of how it could have gotten in your system.
Mke Travers - August 3, 2016
Thanks, Daphne. yup, no supplements for me…..
Joe Ruggless - August 3, 2016
The following is my response to the three questions Ken asked me about this issue:
Do you accept Liz’s explanation for her doping positive? – I have been given no reason to think otherwise.
Do you think Liz should apply for a TUE when her suspension (still to be announced) is over? – I don’t believe this applies in Liz’s case as it stands now. If for some reason she has to take a banned substance to enhance here quality of life, then yes she should apply for a TUE.
Should USADA create more forgiving doping rules for recreational masters athletes? – Absolutely! As I said before, there still needs to be rules, as I don’t want to be competing against a Neanderthal who throws caution to the wind and takes anything to win. I do believe however that if someone needs to take a medication to enhance the quality of their life such as a doctor prescribed and regulated testosterone or a medication to help with elderly issues like memory loss or body function they should be able to take the medication and still enjoy the benefits of competing in Masters Athletics. I know that there is a huge debate about this within the Masters community as I learned from the comments that were posted when Ken published the article on Greg Pizza’s suspension.
For those that do not want to have to compete for medals against athletes who are choosing the quality of life then let’s makes the rules where the aforementioned can’t race for medals or displace other athletes in preliminary or event finals.
All that said, the WADA, USADA and the USATF truly believe that they are getting the message out to all masters athletes about doping. I whole heartedly disagree with that statement. Being a master’s athlete myself, all that had been presented to me in the past was that there was a disclaimer in an event signup sheet that stated there may be random drug testing at the meet I was signing up for. There was no information where to look for banned substances or what organization I should contact to find out what banned substances were. They believe that because they have elaborate websites they have done their jobs. The websites are somewhat convoluted and finding specific substance that one might be taking is an arduous task. Especially if you’re not computer literate.
Now that I am aware of this issue and being President of one of the most prestigious track clubs in the US I am going to make it my mission to educate my club’s athletes on the subject as I suggest all club presidents and directors do the same. Unfortunately there are many unattached athletes out there that will be subject to the ignorance of WADA, USADA and The USATF as far as educating master’s athletes about doping rules. Hopefully that will change.
Michael D Walker - August 3, 2016
Personally, I think that we should just forget testing and make everything legal. There seems to be so many problems with the system and so many ways to abuse it and no end in sight.
That said, I am disappointed that so many of the responses seem to be supportive of those that abuse the system and blame everyone else for their mistakes.
The Dude - August 3, 2016
The only REAL problem here, IMO, is that Liz “purposely avoided taking beneficial risk-reduction breast cancer medications”.
In the grand scheme of things the only people who care about Masters T&F are those of us competing. I, like many of you, have a cigar box full of medals that my daughter will certainly throw away when I die. I know for a fact that she would much rather have me around for a few more years than have to toss two boxes instead of one.
Keep competing or take a drug that extends or improves the quality of my life? Simple choice.
Joe Ruggless - August 3, 2016
Michael Walker, like so many naysayers on this subject, its very easy to just say “screw it, nothing wrong with me, I can go out and chest bang because I don’t have medical issues to deal with. Those that do, well find something else to do beside run against me!” Really is that your message? I agree with The Dude. These medals really are meaning less, and for some we pay thousands of dollars in entries, travel fee and expenses to earn them. Who cares! Didn’t look like anyone abused the system in Liz’s case. Didn’t pass test, punished. End of statement.
Keith McQuitter - August 3, 2016
Liz as a friend and fellow Hurdler im so sad to hear this you are a charm to ower sport you will be very much missed .
Ken Stone - August 3, 2016
Official USADA news release, posted Aug. 3, 2016:
http://www.usada.org/liz-palmer-accepts-doping-sanction/
Michael D Walker - August 3, 2016
Joe Ruggless,
I do have medical issues. What I do is try to stay healthy and within the rules even though I don’t necessarily agree with the rules.
I don’t know Liz and hope that she was not intentionally cheating but face it, it is happening a lot at all levels of the sport. As I suggested in my first post, maybe we should eliminate testing and let people make their own choices.
Joe Ruggless - August 3, 2016
Michael
I hear what you are saying. For those of us who want to compete for national medals, yes we need to follow the rules. It’s all about the best of the best. But for those that just compete in Masterstrack for the fun of it, then let them run. My gripe is that the WADA, USADA and USATF simply shut the athletes down. They treat them as if they are elite or professional athletes. That’s ludicrous. I really wanted Greg Pizza to run at the Striders Meet of Champions that I was the director of. I told him to come and run and we would not give him a place or medal if he were win one. But he was directed by the USATF that he couldn’t enter the event because of his ban. That is where the line should be drawn. Let folks run in a controlled environment and be allowed to fellowship with their Masters breatheron. Let’s face reality, there is such a disparity in time between most masters athletes within their age group, most are racing against themselves anyways. So the USATF to take a stance and not allow folks like Greg or Liz to not run is simply stupid in my book.
George Patterson - August 3, 2016
As a good friend and a staunch supporter for Liz, for quite some time, continually having her back when people would accuse her of impropriety, this ticks me off. I’ve known for awhile and was hoping this wasn’t going to be swept under the rug, that Ken Stone, being a friend of hers, wasn’t going to cover this up or write an article to protect her reputation. Many of her so called friends, have been blind-sided by this and still support her. I see nothing from her “best friend” or fiercest competitor(s) who have know for awhile. She has been running a one woman Liz PR notice for herself for awhile, to soften the verbal, and written blow to her reputation. I find her and her attorney’s written statement in which she tried the Greg Pizza plan of attack an insult to me and fellow athletes, and instead of accepting blame, throwing a smoke screen, stating “why I wouldn’t do this”. I have more to say…just need to take a breath George
Bill Pontius - August 3, 2016
Liz, though I;ve never met you, as a fellow hurdler I’ve admired your ability and results for the last decade at least. I am so sorry you will be unable to participate for a whole Olympiad cycle (less the 6 months). Others have received shorter suspensions while admitting conscious use of banned substance! What a farce our sport is becoming. And I find this very sad. While we all want a level playing field it has become so obvious that our current doping policy does not work for masters. I have been fortunate to not feel the need for supplements even though in my late 60’s if someone convinced me of the efficacy of a particular supplement I’d think it a great idea. Our numbers nose dive at the older age groups. If we want to preserve our sport we must wrestle with this problem apart from open standards. I haven’t an answer, just a plea to look at the issues with open minds.
tb - August 3, 2016
I don’t think Dianabol really counts as a “quality of life” supplement.
A Master's Thrower - August 3, 2016
Wow George with friends like you who needs enemies? Aren’t you a peach. I don’t know Liz but I think her suspension is a bunch of crap. If I would ever meet her I would buy her a beer.
john - August 3, 2016
Here we again with the enablers.
Sure, let’s have a new track meet series, where everything goes. Take whatever you want. During the mile, you can skip a lap if you’re too tired.
For Masters swimmers, we’ll let you wear flippers in the water and compete against those without them, and for Masters cyclists, you’ll be allowed to use a small motor. And on and on.
Liz Palmer is a tremendous athlete and based on the posts here is also a wonderful person. She has also been around the sport for a long time and knows the rules. She broke them. It’s not a felony. But the sport needs standards. Aging is a bitch.
George Patterson - August 3, 2016
23. tb – I know more than I’m saying.
Harry F Kohaut - August 3, 2016
I am a friend and former teammate of Liz, if there was anyone who promotes and highlights our sport it is her. If there is a lesson that comes from this is that we must check our medications and any and all supplements we are taking. Let’s be honest… We are no longer kids and we have medical/pharmaceutical needs that are different than those younger athletes on there way to Rio. Honestly… I would fail a drug test because of the current meds I require. That said, because of this situation I will find a solution… I hope! However, that being said, I know Liz Palmer personally and will speak for her character and integrity. The reason for her success was simple… It is called HARD WORK! George Patterson… You are wrong and out of line! Shame on you!
Terry Parks - August 3, 2016
Why should we eliminate testing at the a national and world level. I see no good reason; I believe that if nothing else it deters deliberate cheating at the big meets. The desire to be better should be achieved by means other than banned PED’s otherwise there is no point I having any type of high level competition. It took me six years of hard work, one knee surgery to win my first outdoor national title. National and World titles would be meaningless if we say take whatever drug you want to try to win. I am sure people already take banned PED’s and compete, but they probably don’t compete at the National or World level. If they do, they run the risk of getting caught and that is a choice they are free to make. So tue argument of eliminating testing rings hallow to me.
Lyon or Bust - August 3, 2016
George Patterson: Are you implying that this was a not a one time mistake? Are you saying that you knew before the meet in New Mexico that she was using PED’s? I think you implied that her competitors have accused her of using PED’s, is this correct. Please do not keep us in the dark.
Peter L. Taylor - August 4, 2016
I’m still missing something. Why would someone who is at high risk for breast cancer, someone who has been offered raloxifene to counter that high risk, someone who has a ready source of medical counseling in the form of her husband, who is a physician, knowingly ingest something that would increase her risk of breast cancer?
It just doesn’t make sense.
If I am one of the small minority of people with a high familial risk of lung cancer wetirywa t hlike llme
Peter L. Taylor - August 4, 2016
Well, I didn’t realize I hadn’t deleted my last line, and so I will continue (it’s 5:33 in the morning). If I’m one of the small minority of Americans with a high familial risk of lung cancer, will I decide to become a regular smoker of cigarettes?
A Master's Thrower - August 4, 2016
As an attorney allow me to inject a small piece of advice. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion however to say you “know” of certain things implies these things are facts and not simply opinions. Libel is a published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation and is a civil tort. Unless Ms. Palmer has a prior positive test or has been convicted of smuggling contraband through customs, you don’t have proof of such things that you say you “know”. The tone of an earlier comment shows malicious intent. This tort can open someone up to a lawsuit for damages. Tread carefully.
chuckxc - August 4, 2016
#27 – George Patterson – this is the kind of thing Trump does. “I could call so and so a _______, but i won’t” Well, ya just did by bringing it up.
Say what you know or don’t say anything.
tb - August 4, 2016
Pete, who can say? What if you thought cigarettes would extend your announcing career, you loved the feeling that gave you, and, when stacked with a lung cancer equivalent of tamoxifen, weren’t as risky?
By the way, I made that up! Don’t start smoking.
Mr. Masters Lawyer, we “know” the USADA accepted Ms. Palmer’s admission of a methandienone (Dianabol) violation. Do enlighten us if George was implying otherwise.
The National Senior Games does not appear to test, by the way, so that remains an option.
charles roll - August 4, 2016
Well, I guess we know why Liz decided to go dark. I support her and wish her all the best in health and in life.
chuckxc - August 4, 2016
Yes, we do know there was an admission of a violation. The implication involves intent. If one can prove intent, then they are duty bound to share what they know. If they can’t, just let the violator do their time and leave it at that. The same net meant to catch cheaters will also snare people who simply made a mistake. I don’t believe all violators are cheaters, per se. Cheaters should be vilified and shamed out of the sport. But that’s the rub, you have to actually KNOW intent. If you can prove it, by all means, do !
Michael D Walker - August 4, 2016
Peter,
A comment on deliberately taking PED’s even though they can be harmful. A number of years ago, a survey was done with Olympic level athletes and they were asked the question – if they could take a pill that would guarantee a Gold Medal but you would die a year later, would you take it? – At least half said that they would take the pill.
Lyon or Bust - August 4, 2016
George Patterson needs to tell us what we don’t know. We are obviously missing a significant portion of the story.
Weia Reinboud - August 4, 2016
Agree with Terry. One of the nice things of our sport is that it is an experiment on ageing at a very great scale. I love making statistics etcetera, unfortunately there have been some masters world record breakers who deliberately cheated. Cancelling drug testing for masters at the world level, would lead to more cheaters and would destroy that part of my hobby. And would destroy the experiment.
Milan Jamrich - August 4, 2016
Discussion on this forum gives the impression that most of the athletes are for taking PEDs. Do we have any statistics on this. What does the silent majority of people think?
Marcus O'Sullivan - August 4, 2016
I read the link provided by Daphne on contaminated supplements. Can a supplement be contaminated with a metabolite of a banned substance? I thought a metabolite was a leftover or by product of the original substance, in this case, Dianobol. I take a moderate amount of supplements, such as protein powder or maybe Creatine. My times are too slow to be competitive enough to be at an event to be tested, but this contamination thing is surprising.
Don Schaefer - August 4, 2016
http://www.usada.org/testing/results/sanctions/
Interesting the sanction times allotted for recent violations. USADA doesn’t even have the balls to put the true sanction for Liz on their website, instead reporting it as a 6 month violation –Hardly. ( I did call them and left a contrite message) My wife and I are friends of Liz’s and find USADA;s action in this case to be pure scapegoating. Look at many of the other violators—seems many got off pretty easy for some rather serious PED’s.. In Liz’s case we both know that she obviously never ingested this complex drug( try finding that drug they list on Global Dro) on purpose and the minuscule amount ( even USADA agreed with her that it was certainly not intentional) undoubtedly had no advantage in her racing or training. Those of you who think you are above getting nailed like this…be careful–they have even found that beef from Mexico and S.American countries can trigger a positive PED ( google it) The GMO and scientific changes the planet is making to our food supply , only time will tell how it is going to affect these tests. . We need different rules for Masters athletes plain and simple. I keep repeating this every time something comes–but soon only the lucky genetic perfect few will be competing by themselves. How much fun is that? Where is USATF as our advocate–I keep hearing rumors they are working on it? We are truly saddened by what has happened to Liz…It shouldn’t have –3 1/2 years for that—disgusting.
sandyT - August 4, 2016
https://www.facebook.com/notes/usatfmasterstrack/list-of-resources-for-drugs-in-sport/1020078738110682
Peter L. Taylor - August 4, 2016
Yes, I am aware of that survey, Michael Walker (no. 38). In fairness, however, I am 100% sure that Liz does not respect or buy into that kind of craziness. She’s an amateur athlete who will never reap the vast psychological rewards that those Olympic-level athletes were putting into the equation.
Liz is a level-headed person, and I respect her a great deal.
Tom Sputo - August 4, 2016
We are all at some risk of being nailed in the same way. If you read the abstract to the report that Daphne linked to, even OTC vitamins are potentially contaminated because the raw materials come from China in some cases. Protein powder … yes a lot comes from China. Growth hormones in meats. Food products with ingredients from overseas that may be contaminated. So I’d caution others to not get too high up on their horse, because the fall from high up hurts.
Michael D Walker - August 4, 2016
Milan [41],
I used to think that it was a very small percentage of masters athletes taking PED’s but after reading the recent discussions about those who have been caught, I have the same impression as you. Staying PED free can be a complex issue and I do have sympathy for anyone who accidentally takes the wrong thing but it really sounds like there are a lot of people abusing the system to gain an edge.
Daphne Sluys - August 4, 2016
https://www.fanduel.com/insider/2016/05/04/after-nfl-warning-is-steroid-tainted-meat-a-real-thing/
Thanks Don Schaefer for the heads up about the tainted beef! Yikes!
Yes Tom, even OTC vitamins….who has never taken vitamn C, or a multi-vitamin?
I have spent hours using the resources such as those posted by SandyT, with mixed results. Not all ingredients are found on these lists, the live responses have typically only been partially useful, ingredients go by a variety of names. At the end of the day, after hours of researching one is still left with doubts and questions about company reputation, ingredient sourcing and contamination. For example this year i was researching seasonal allergy medication and ended up not taking anything because i could not be 100% sure about the sport-legality of any one product.
Now i have doubts about eating beef from the wrong source…there goes eating out, or travelling to certain places?? Staying healthy and only ingesting healthy products sure is challenging, athlete or not.
Mary Harada - August 4, 2016
To have to chose between one’s health and a possible drug test failure is very sad for masters athletes. As we age our bodies sometimes need medication in order to maintain our health or to correct problems that arise with age. As masters who make no money – and in fact spend our own money to attend meets we are held to the high standard of professional athletes trying to earn a living from their sport. This is ridiculous to say the least.
I am profoundly sad for Liz. I do not know her well but I have admired her dedication to masters track. We are not better off for her being banned. Personally I think that those who think there are “a lot of people abusing the system” are overreacting. Any of us who take vitamins or supplements of any sort can be caught by taking something that has been contaminated without our knowing it.
Don Schaefer - August 4, 2016
Mary Harada; simply eloquent !!! Thank You !!
Lyon or Bust - August 4, 2016
George Patterson: If you have intel that would give us a different perspective please do so, because most of the comments are tainted with bias.
Mr.X - August 4, 2016
Ref. Don Schaefer emotional comments.
1.USADA 6 month is a typo, nothing to do with “balls”.Pretty obvious reduction time mistakenly put in as suspension.
2. What do you mean by “contrite” message. Not sure you’re using that word correctly.
3.not sure you understand being “friends of Liz’s” doesn’t exactly help your defense of Liz.
4. How exactly is USADA “pure scapegoating” her.
5. Sounds like USADA bent over backwards to help her. What else would you like to see them do?
6. What do you want USATF to do on her behalf?
7. Come up with some rule changes that make sense and you’ll be a hero.
8. Look, basically, your entire defense, minus the contaminated substance part could just as easily be used to defend someone you knew to be straight up guilty. The whole “miniscule amount” and “undoubtedly had no advantage in her training” is especially insulting. Liz, herself, with her apparently extensive knowledge of “cycling” would be able to counter that immediately if it came out of a competitors mouth.
Lastly, there’s a decent chance Liz had some real bad luck here. I have no idea. Every time I see one of these stories I think about my tub of Muscle Milk 100 calorie protein powder and imagine the worst. Even commenting on it makes me feel like it’ll jinx me. That being said, what’s the solution? If the contaminated substance defense is a ‘Go’ the abuse will be exponential.
I apologize that my English is poor.
Daphne Sluys - August 4, 2016
Example: I’ve just tried to research the sport-legality of the product that was offered freely at Grand Rapids Nationals: Garden of Life, Dr formulated Probiotics for men and women. The manufacturer/product does not appear on the NSF site or the BSCG site as being “safe”. The product sounds good and i guess it is sport-legal because it was offered at the Nationals and because the manufacturer is a sponsor for USATF:
https://www.gardenoflife.com/content/raw-organic-protein-hit-usatf-national-team-training-camp/
The globaldro site came up empty when i searched there, …guess it is supplement not a medication…and when i clicked on the supplement button, i got into a mess of links that did not pertain to my specific question….so i sent in a personal question and await a reply.
My point in sharing: this is a complex issue even for something as simple as a freeby probiotic sample obtained at a National USATF meet. Simply offering a few links to check for legality of supplements is at best only partially helpful. Are there any USATF, USADA, WADA officials who can really answer my question as to the sport-legality of these probiotics before i pop them in my mouth?
Tom Sputo - August 4, 2016
Here is my deal. I’m a thrower, I eat a lot of dead animal (don’t worry, my BP and lipids are controlled by a permitted anti-hypertensive and lipids by niacin). So there is that issue. I take letter and multi-vitamins plus zinc and magnesium. It’s hot in Florida, I need the minerals. Add in OTC fish oil and CoQ10 and extended release niacin, under by MD’s direction. Allergy meds not on the WADA list,hey environmental allergies go together with Florida like bacon and eggs.
So, if I fill a cup for USADA and I turn up positive for some contaminating prohibited substance??? Or how about the rest of you who may be throwing stones?
Point that I am making is that for an elite athlete in good health who has the resources to do an exhaustive investigation, that is one thing. For the rest of us, we investigate as best we can with GlobalDro or other sources. But for what we consider to be OK suppliments like vitamins and minerals, who knows what contaminants there may be. How do I know where “brand name pharmacy” is sourcing their magnesium from, now or 6 months from now.
There has to be some reality check. If I believe Liz (and I do), a warning and loss of result should have been more than sufficient under the current listing, considering the circumstances. If USADA and WADA want to play the game this way, there will be ramifications for the long term viability of masters T&F. We bemoan the lower and lower number of participants at Nationals, yet we set rules in place that force a choice between health and participation.
And which one of us wants to have the public shaming from USADA when all we might have done is take a multivitamin that unknown to us came from a Chinese or Mexican factory that also produced anabolic substances?
charles roll - August 4, 2016
Well said, Tom.
Don Schaefer - August 4, 2016
Mr. X: first of all your English is fine-no apologies necessary–I got everything you said. You may well be right about the 6 month thing , but then again they could have put the word Dianabol instead of the chemistry lesson –Seems like the missed on both of those–sort of like maybe we dont want people to know about this one? I don’t like complainers who dont try to fix things either. I can assure you I have sent letters to both USATF and USADA trying to give them ideas on how to change from Elite rules to rules for Masters whose health demands are far different. Yep–not going to be a hero for sure..but I do try. What do I think they should have done…A Public warning ( its done–look at the recent sanctions page) Dq’ results, and medals returned. I agree, we both look at our Costco Protein Powder and wonder just like you…Hopefully the community can help get this changed if there is enough who want it changed. If not the community will continue to shrink. Good questions all..hope I answered them for you.
Mr.X - August 4, 2016
I’m leaning towards agreeing with you and Tom on toning down the penalties and public shaming. I tried looking at that Global Dro site when a friend recommended (can I mention name brands here?) N.O.-Xplode as a preworkout pick me up. After about 5 minutes I was like….can’t they just put a picture of the product and say ‘Go’ or ‘No Go’ ?! but of course that wouldn’t solve real contamination issues or claims of contamination. Anyway, I reread my initial post and it seems a little too confrontational so thank you for the professional response.
jbub - August 4, 2016
In todays Los Angeles Times Sports Section,in the “TRANSACTIONS” column, under Olympic Sports, there was a mention of Lizs positive test.
Tom Sputo - August 4, 2016
Don S. (56). USADA listed the compound correctly by it’s generic name. Dianabol is one tradename that the compound methandienone was manufactured under, years ago. There were (are) also other tradenames for the compound. So USADA was not partaking in funny business, they were being quite correct. How did I figure this out? Plenty of resources on the web, along with a desire to learn. Also, the English is pretty clear as to the length of the suspension as 3 year, 6 months. Rather than looking for a conspiracy under every stone, maybe what is written is actually quite correct?
Ken Stone - August 4, 2016
In the course of researching an article for MyNewsLA.com, I learned that masters anti-doping czar Stephen Cohen says a masters official has contacted USADA and WADA in an effort “to start a dialog about aging athletes, but I have no proof of any success in this effort.”
So stay tuned on that. Check this out:
http://mynewsla.com/sports/2016/08/04/playa-vista-hurdler-56-draws-3-12-year-doping-suspension/
Cyber Horse - August 4, 2016
How very interesting that George Patterson acknowledged and feared the very real possibility of a contaminated supplement causing a positive test.
Comments 2 and 3 in the link. http://masterstrack.com/m40-middle-distancer-fred-kieser-gets-8-month-drug-suspension/#comments
Don Schaefer - August 4, 2016
Tom Sputo–Just frustrated and upset when I wrote that , should have taken a senior time out before writing…..thanks
Joe Ruggless - August 5, 2016
Ken
When I met with Bill Bock, general counsel for USADA, I explained to him that they needed to take a harder look on how MASTERS differ from Elite and Professional athletes and how the rules and policies for MASTERS should be modified to address these different requirements that ageing athletes need. I also explained that the reason most MASTERS athletes compete is for recreation and fun not like the Elites or Professionals who do it for a living.
I also warned him that there is potential for Masters meet directors to start putting on meets sans USATF sanction to make a statement to WADA, USADA and the USATF.
That got their attention because Mr. Bock asked me to reiterate that statement and his final question to me was, “as a meet director would I put on a meet sans the USATF”, and my reply was “absolutely”.
The other factor of having a Non-Sanctioned meet is because the cost is becoming horrendous. The day of the officials costing $25 to $50 is gone. At our meet we paid the USATF officials on the average $125 with some at $250. If we are not careful there will be no meets for MASTERS dope free or not.
Tom Sputo - August 5, 2016
Joe (62) thank you for the update and also for having taken the stand that you did. If there is anything I can do to further the cause, feel free to find me.
Michael D Walker - August 5, 2016
I think that Joe is approaching things correctly.
Derek Royce Gaskin - August 5, 2016
I think there should be allowances for masters for TUE. Just make it conditional like foreign athletes that are allowed to compete here but just aren’t allowed to medal. Just do the * thing. Also, I think for historic purposes, any records should not be allowed. Because athletes that did get records without TUE support can still stand on a level ground. That way it can just be fun for everyone without any worries. But I do think masters should seek TUE to use, just to protect against health issues for the athlete (protect from the slippery slope). Opiates were good for health too, look at what that’s done when allowed to spiral out of control.
My OPINION is that she did not intend this and is getting punished pretty harsh. I say take away the medal and let her compete. The ordeal(shame she’s enduring) seems to be more than enough punishment.
Maybe the punishment should that you pay for the test you failed and banishment from medaling for a period of time. Peer pressure alone would be enough, having to show up to a meet after being caught, whew!
Tom Sputo - August 5, 2016
Derek (65) but part of the situation with Palmer is that there was inadvertent exposure involved here. A TUE would do nothing to solve that issue.
Also, the final rulings from USADA are not consistent regarding inadvertent exposure. Compare the Palmer inadvertent exposure with a 42 month suspension to Shaldybin who received a warning. http://www.usada.org/kristen-shaldybin-accepts-finding-of-no-fault-for-anti-doping-rule-violation/
Also, Gwen Berry who lost a US record and around $30,000 http://www.usada.org/gwen-berry-accepts-sanction/ to Tierney who committed essentially the same violation and received nothing but a warning http://www.usada.org/sam-tierney-receives-public-warning/
It is hard to understand how USADA operates in these cases.
The Dude - August 5, 2016
@ #38, Regarding the survey of Olympic athelets willing to die in a year after taking a pill that would guarentee a gold medal.
I’d heard about this but was never sure if it was an urban legand or actual fact. Took a little digging but found that it’s called the Goldman Dilemma. Not sure if I can post a link here, but if you’re interested there’s a short article in Wikipedia.
Short version, in the 1970’s and 80’s, the answer was indeed 50% or more. By 2009 it was down to 6%. Part of the reduction was attributed to “the development of a clearer moral stance on doping”.
After all is said and done, I wonder how many of the “yes” responders would have taken a placebo adminstered by a “doctor” the next day. May be a lot of bravado until they had to put some skin in the game.
Lyon or Bust - August 5, 2016
I am still waiting for George Patterson to chime in on this conversation. Tell us what you know.
Cyber Horse - August 5, 2016
Lyon, it appears there’s nothing to wait for.
Lyon or Bust - August 5, 2016
Cyber House: I disagree.
Cyber Horse - August 5, 2016
Your obsession is getting weird. You have posted the same comment almost a half dozen times. Don’t you have anything better to do than to anxiously await gossip on a message board? It appears you view it as a salacious turn-on. Get a life. I have better things to do than to engage in this distasteful tripe. Over and out.
Lyon or Bust - August 5, 2016
Cyber Horse: If there is more information I would like to know before I make a determination or judgment. George seemed knowlegdable regarding the facts that some folks may be missing. I am sorry that you feel the need to insult me when I am just attempting to gather information.
Rusty - August 5, 2016
It so disingenuous for so many to refer to this sport as just recreation. Some of you guys are elite – elite for your age. You are capable of doing things that are truly remarkable at any age. And to be able to reach such high levels of achievement requires a commitment that goes far beyond recreation. The reasons why the high achievers and, for that matter, the rest of us who want to try to compete, can be boiled down to one of these basic premises:
a desire to be elite, a desire to be the best you can be (i.e. healthy and fit), a desire to be recognized (at various levels) and ego (achieving goals,etc.).
Nothing wrong with any of these reasons. That is what drives athletes of all ages and of all skill levels. To say that you do not understand why someone would cheat flies in the face of everything that anyone who has ever competed would know first hand. Money, or the possibility of earning money, is not the motivating factor. Look at the Olympics – take out men’s basketball and the likelihood of making money for any of those athletes is nil. The likelihood for most of these athletes of even getting a medal is nil. The 2012 Olympics men’s 100 meter dash had 85 contestants – maybe 10 had a chance to medal.The same can be said for any event and any sport. And, yet, these athletes will do and try almost anything to accomplish their goals. I have coached kids in high school, with little chance of playing at higher level, take steroids – just to try to play at the varsity level. You see other examples of athletes willing to compete at almost any cost include many who compete in crossfit, bodybuilding, endurance events, etc.
The posts about 50% or 6% taking something that they know is life-threatening are missing the point – a very high percentage of athletes of all stripes already do this, just under a different guise called supplementation. Many have convinced themselves that supplementation is not cheating, only enhancing or giving a helping hand. And yet everyone knows full well that some of those supplements are as close to taking steriods or PEDs that is ‘legally’ possible. The health risks to your kidneys, heart, liver, etc. are well known, yet millions of people take these supplements every day. So, those percentages mean nothing – people expose themselves to excessive risks on regular basis by just taking these supplements. They just convince themselves that it isn’t that bad for them and that it isn’t cheating.
Simple answer to all these posts – don’t take supplements, take the drugs you need that are prescribed by your doctor and file a TUE before competing. I may be missing something but it seems like a simple premise.
And quit trying to beg for mercy and leniency from the USATF, USADA and WADA gods – it makes everyone associated with masters look as something less than what they should be seen as – which is, people trying to be the best to the degree that is possible for each individual. And, for some, their best is truly elite.
Michael D Walker - August 5, 2016
Rusty, well said.
tb - August 5, 2016
Hear, hear, Rusty.
The conflation of this case with that of TUE’s has been irritating. Not that TUE’s solve everything. See asthma, for instance.
Cyber Horse - August 5, 2016
Bill, there are no facts, only innuendo.
PED - August 5, 2016
Like I said on the Greg Pizza story, let everyone dope if they want to. Dianabol, testosterone, aderall, whatever ya’ll like.
Just have different AA standards and different podiums for the dopers. that way we all get to compete, enjoy the camaraderie and fun, etc. . . . and it also ensures a level playing field for the dopers and for non-dopers.
Weia Reinboud - August 6, 2016
Well said, Rusty!
Mr.X - August 6, 2016
Rusty, there’s some interesting general observations in your post and then all of a sudden you go off the reservation about supplements and then even worse is the painfully naive bit about doctors prescribing the “drugs you need”. Yeah, because Doctors never prescribe the drugs you ‘WANT’ or unnecessary drugs, or the drugs that Big Pharma pushes them to prescribe. You imply taking legal ( maybe “legal” needs clarifying) supplements is cheating, that gets into a slippery slope of already much discussed other types of legal performance enhancing, from professional coaching, training facilities, physical therapists and masseuses, expensive high quality food, A job that’s conducive to training. etc. Please, I don’t need anyone to tell me, or hijack the thread going on about the ‘difference’ between those and BANNED substances. You mention a couple of times about how people convince themselves taking legal supplements isn’t cheating. The same could easily be said for TUE’s…..What does make sense about your argument though is that not taking supplements would go a long way towards eliminating the “contamination”angle. IMO that’s just not a realistic solution though.
Before a bunch of doctors jump on here and defend your profession be advised I’ve lived in many foreign countries and dozens of States including FLORIDA. I ain’t tryin to hear anything about some Hippocratic oath. Don’t embarrass yourselves.
David E. Ortman (M63), Seattle, WA - August 6, 2016
Mr. X (#80) states that not taking supplements is not a realistic solution.
Supplements are not regulated by the FDA (with the limited exception that “If the dietary supplement contains a NEW ingredient, manufacturers must notify FDA about that ingredient prior to marketing. However, the notification will only be reviewed by FDA (not approved) and only for safety, not effectiveness.”) http://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/UsingDietarySupplements/ucm109760.htm
Remember the warnings we gave our teen-age children? Don’t ingest pills offered at parties. You have no idea what is in them. The same applies to supplements.
And, to my knowledge, doctors do not prescribe “supplements.” Therefore, despite the TV ads that blatantly advertise Human Growth Hormone and other miracle potions, there is no excuse for self-prescribing supplements.
Doctor (over?) prescribed medication is handled through the TUE process, although it is valid to ask whether it is fair to have a TUE medicated competitor in the next lane.
As someone has pointed out, it is possible to run around with a suitcase full of supplements, magic pills, and super vitamins and compete and set records at a large number of meets, including Regional Masters meets or State Games, where drug testing simply doesn’t occur.
That being said, much more needs to be done on competition and medication for masters/senior athletes. It is a rare master/senior athlete that is not on some prescription medication (most of which is not performance enhancing and in fact may be performance decreasing) and we will all likely be surrounded by brown prescription pill bottles at some point or other.
See: http://ortmanmarchand.com/fsk.html
Finally, a 3 and 1/2 year masters ban seems extremely excessive, especially with what we know of elite athletes who have received far less.
mark williamson - August 6, 2016
People make choices for different motivational reasons. They want something so bad its worth doing in their mind. Some athletes take this way too serious. To the point they think they are a superstar for getting a few masters medals. That is the at the core of taking drugs. People want something and are willing to make a sacrifice to some degree and take a risk. They justify it in their minds by telling themselves lots of drugs have risks. Lets have a clean list provided by the same people that make the judgements on users. That way the person caught is either lying or there is a problem with the supplement industry. Anyone taking OTC drugs or vitamin mineral supplement need to be assured by a list or an official recognized document stating its clean. An athlete should feel safe taking needed drugs or supplements and safe reporting the use without any action against them. By reporting it they may avoid suspension and just incur a disqualification from a specific meet.
The report of use must be kept from any testing group. Tests should be blind and random as well as for record breaking performances. Reporting should not as source for bringing down an athlete. This releases the drug companies putting responsibility on the athlete and the sport for monitoring and allowing them to compete. Drugs and supplements are a part of aging. Lets not create monsters but assure fairness with checks and balances in this costly area for both the athlete and the sport.
Tom Sputo - August 6, 2016
Little clarification to David (81). There are supplements that I think you are referring to (say Super Muscle Explode or something like that). Then there the OTC supplements that MD’s may prescribe. For instance, at my MD’s suggestion / direction, I take OTC fish oil, CoQ10, glucosamine, ER niacin, and vitamin D. I also take OTC anti-oxidant vitamins (inconclusive, but 20 years from now I won’t want to regret it) and electrolyte minerals (magnesium and zinc because it is hot-hot-hot here in Florida).
Are you going to differentiate between those things that are taken with the promise of miracle performance, and those that are nothing more than additional supplimentation of what is also in food products? I may not know what is in Super Muscle Explode, but a magnesium tablet should be simply be magnesium and binders (looking at the bottle now with the sweat dripping off me). So your analogy of pills at a party is not completely correct.
David E. Ortman (M63), Seattle, WA - August 6, 2016
Tom (83): Valid points, although the supplements you list (at an MD’s “suggestion”) are available from a variety of sources, including OTC, mail-order, and overseas. So, yes, a magnesium tablet should just be magnesium and binders, but who knows. Back to pills at a party.
And Mark’s suggestion (84) that there should be a list of “clean” supplements is good in theory, but a “list” does not ensure that the supplement source has not been adulterated.
We all have different medical histories and limiting master/senior competition to only those who have never suffered a medical condition is not realistic either. Most of us will never be drug tested at a track meet,but knowing that it is possible should reduce the incidents of self-medication and increase TUE applications for prescribed medication.
No master/senior athlete that I know of is making a living by competing in master/senior track meets. If the current WSDA/USADA system needs fixing for masters/seniors then let’s try to fix it. If FDA needs to regulate the supplement industry, then USATF should lobby for Congressional reforms.
Finally, the argument that it’s only parts per billion, does not hold water. The world population is about 7.4 billion. Seven terrorists would be equivalent to one part per billion, yet are capable of doing significant damage. Do not be misled that parts per billion or even parts per trillion are too small to matter.
JStone - August 6, 2016
In response to post # 63, masters meet directors wanting to make statements should be prepared for strong responses from USADA and USATF.
Does anyone remember years ago when there was a rule which prohibited clean athletes from competing with banned athletes currently serving a doping suspension? If I remember correctly, clean athletes could have been deemed contaminated by just being in the same competition with an athlete who violated or ignored the terms of their suspension.
Anonymousie - August 6, 2016
You’re missing the point. We’re starting to not care about USATF and its minions any longer.
Steve Viegas - August 7, 2016
I am a masters middle distance track and field athlete and road runner. I am a USATF association officer, a coach certified by USATF and RRCA and I am a lawyer. I take my responsibilities as an athlete very seriously. I compete for MassVelocity. I wrote the following on the MassVelocity Facebook page after seeing commentary about Liz Palmer there and here.
“I am so very disappointed with the commentary on the article I posted yesterday about Liz Palmer’s ban. I cannot begin to describe how disturbed I was after reading all the commentary posted on masterstrack.com. I would hate to believe that what I read represents the thinking of the masters track and field community.
I understand that most of our club has gotten to know Liz Palmer through competition and during the time she lived in the New England area. It is considerate and kind as friends to console someone who has gone through a series of events like Liz Palmer. I expected to see comments of this nature and not the enabling comments made in response to me and those posted on masterstrack.com.
I was appalled to read Liz Palmer’s highly emotional, over-sharing and scapegoating 1440 word letter.
I described her yesterday as a drug cheat. Angry MassVelocity members hit back at me. I’m sorry friends, that is who Liz Palmer is. No one slipped her a mickey containing Dianabol. She ingested it and it was found in her sample. Most critical thinking people are aware of the dangers of steroids. Most drug cheats are willing to take the risk for the reward despite what they may say later. Liz Palmer has had a highly rewarded athletic career. She repeats a pattern familiar to observers of sport by diverting your attention to an imaginary way that she came to ingest Dianabol. It had to be in the supplements she was taking. When no Dianabol was found in the supplement she supplied or in the supplement WADA purchased, she then engages in a shell game. Somehow she got a tainted batch and she just missed proving her point because the lot numbers didn’t match.
Wake up!
PED use damages our sport. It is time to think critically about PED use. We need to show tough love to our friends who are caught using. It doesn’t mean we can’t care for them. I hope we all care for this sport we all love and will do what is necessary to keep it clean, even it it means speaking an inconvenient truth out loud as I have. “
John impson - August 7, 2016
Want to bet that winning doesn’t count. How about $1500.00 to go to Perth.
SusieQ - August 8, 2016
Lance Armstrong? A cancer survivor would never do drugs, right, and risk his life?
Lyon or Bust - August 8, 2016
Steve Viegas thank you for saying what no else will, she doped for the purpose of gaining an edge over her rival(s).
Michael D Walker - August 8, 2016
Steve [87], We may never know for sure if Liz deliberately cheated but I have to agree with you.
rscalhoun - August 8, 2016
After reading all of the self-righteous indignant comments from this courageous group of keyboard warriors, one very disturbing thing was obvious: All the posters were male.
I’m not saying that if Liz Palmer were Larry Palmer your opinions would be any different. I understand that some of you are very passionate about this subject but I doubt that you would be as vicious with your public remarks if your target was a different gender. You wouldn’t have the guts to post with such vitriol about another man. A woman however is fair game.
What a sexist misogynistic group you are. It’s disgusting.
Stephen you proudly proclaim that you are an attorney. That makes me disregard your opinion for the simple reason that a lawyer’s support can be bought. If Liz Palmer had hired you to represent her in this case you would be one of her most ardent defenders and staunch supporters. It’s all about the Benjamins. No offense to all other attorneys out there. I love what it says on your website, “Attorney Viegas works from the outset to de-escalate tensions and emotions so that parties may engage in a meaningful dialog….” Well done, Attorney Viegas. Nothing like walking the talk.
I’m sure Liz Palmer puts ketchup on her steak and kicks puppies, too. Carry on, gents.
tb - August 8, 2016
Not only have you not read previous threads, you clearly haven’t even read this one!
Now, where’s my sammich? Sexists, indeed…
Joe Patridge II - August 8, 2016
Eat a balanced diet, train intelligently and respect the aging process.
Steve Viegas - August 9, 2016
rscalhoun Ad hominem arguments hardly help advance discussion on this topic. When you have something meaningful to add to this discussion, I’ll respond.
Michael D Walker - August 9, 2016
The interest in this subject is amazing. Nothing more to add but wanted to help the discussion move toward 100 posts.
Bill Newsham - August 9, 2016
97….pass the donuts.
Weia Reinboud - August 10, 2016
Another twist: I can’t see a reason to take supplements. Everything is in my meals and I have no inclination to look for a tiny improvement by taking pills or so. The supplement industry suggests more than can be true.
JES - August 10, 2016
@Weia #98: After reading the original post and (especially) the comments thread, I’m not sure we should even take ordinary multivitamins anymore. Who knows what goes on in that Flintstones Gummy factory?
tb - August 10, 2016
I think ‘supplements’ refers to things and the search for things that promise to give you the benefits of steroids, amphetamines, asthma medication, etc., without, supposedly, containing them.
Pretty sure we’re ok with plain old vitamins, although I’m sure someone has pulled that excuse before.
Michael D Walker - August 10, 2016
Re 100, every excuse in the book has been used including several concerning tainted vitamins. We went over 100 posts! Is that a record?
anonymous - August 10, 2016
The USATF SafeSport Handbook prohibits bullying, both in person and online. The handbook defines it as:
“Examples of bullying prohibited by this Policy include, without limitation:
2. Verbal and emotional behaviors. Behaviors that include: a. teasing, ridiculing, intimidating; b. spreading rumors or making false statements; or c. using electronic communications, social media, or other technology to harass, frighten, intimidate or humiliate (“cyber bullying”). ”
Mr. Viegas has represented himself as a USATF association officer and as such is held to a higher standard of behavior when speaking on subjects that affect or involve USATF and its members. His opinion could be interpreted as representing the viewpoint of the association, as he is identifying himself as one of its officers. Because of his position, his conduct both in person and online when representing himself as an officer is subject to a greater degree of scrutiny.
USATF addresses internally alleged policy violations and misconduct – bullying, harassment, hazing – that are not reportable under relevant state or federal law. Furthermore, USATF will not encourage, allow or tolerate attempts from any individual to retaliate, punish, allow or in any way harm any individual(s) who reports a concern in good faith.
Mr. Viegas’s post on this blog entry fits the definition of 2(c) and should be reported to USATF and all relevant parties.
Lyon or Bust - August 11, 2016
You are way off. She tested positive for PEDS and all individuals have a right to their opinions. He did not harass, intimidate, frighten or humiliate her in his post. He merely expressed his opinion. You are obviously a protector of Liz Palmer which bothers me on some level because I feel you are supporting her PED use. I believe that she used PED’s to get a leg up on her arch rival(s), mainly Joy Upshaw. The irony is that she lost the races and her reputation in the Masters Track and Field community.
Anonymousie - August 11, 2016
We are all entitled to our opinions, Bill.
Tom Sputo - August 11, 2016
Mr. Lyon or Bust (103), you are making a pretty severe accusation regarding Palmer and her supposed intentions. Honorable individuals identify themselves when doing this, although some of us do know who you are. Would you like to identify yourself publicly like most of the rest of us have?
Lyon or Bust - August 11, 2016
I am entitled to my opinion and you and others can disagree, I am okay with that.
Bill Pontius - August 11, 2016
Hey Ken, why do you allow fo;ks to post without identifying themselves?
Ken Stone - August 12, 2016
My answer, Bill:
http://masterstrack.com/why-i-allow-anonymous-comments-on-masterstrack-com/
Peter L. Taylor - August 12, 2016
Tom Sputo, I like your various posts, especially no. 67. I was poster no. 1, and I see that a lot of people don’t agree with me. So be it.
In terms of reviewing Liz Palmer’s case, the first thing I would want to know about would be her family history. It turns out that she has an extensive family history of cancer. This is significant because having such a history can influence your behavior on a daily basis, including what you eat, whether you smoke or not, etc.
Second, I would want to know about her own clinical history. For reasons of confidentiality, I cannot detail what I know. I can only say that her clinical history demonstrates high risk for breast cancer.
Third, I would want to know whether Liz is well-informed about health matters, and it certainly appears that she is.
With this information in hand, it is essentially impossible for me to believe that she intentionally ingested the steroid identified, given the implications for her health of such ingestion. We are left, then, with unintentional ingestion.
For some people this is too far-fetched, but clearly it seems to be the only logical answer, as statistically unlikely as it might seem to some.
The fact that she couldn’t produce the correct lot number for the dose of interest is meaningless to me.
People don’t normally write down the lot numbers of everything (or anything) they take, and I wouldn’t expect Liz to do that either. Furthermore, we need to recognize how the world has changed in terms of the sources of what we put in our bodies.
One vote for L. Palmer.
Peter L. Taylor - August 12, 2016
Oh, I forgot one thing (it’s still fairly early). The fact that Liz was prescribed raloxifene, which has been proven effective for some groups of women in preventing breast cancer, but did not take it because it’s a banned drug, is huge to me.
It shows me that she was aware of the issue of banned drugs and was so determined to avoid any problems with her eligibility for competition that she actually turned down a drug that could benefit her.
Steve Viegas - August 12, 2016
I’ve been involved in masters track for many decades. I had never commented in masterstrack.com until I became aware of Ken Stone’s article about Liz Palmer’s suspension. Had I not read Liz Palmer’s 1,440 page statement, wouldn’t have commented as I did.
I agree with Michael D Walker [91.] understood that none of us know if her actions were deliberate. Obviously none of us were there to see what she took and none of us are privy to what she was thinking at the time. To me her statement wasn’t helpful.
Like many cycling fans, I supported Lance Armstrong against doping charges for years, based on reports that he had been tested numerous times and hadn’t failed a test which WADA could point to. It was an eye-opener to see the elaborate regime he put in place to defeat drug testing for himself and his teammates. Watching the Tour de France was an important part of my summer sports viewing. I don’t watch it anymore. I do follow it online and hope the day will come when cycling will be a clean sport.
Once an athlete tests positive, his or her credibility is very weak. As it is here. We will watch Justin Gatlin take on Usain Bolt next week. He famously argued that one of his two positive test results probably came about from shaking hands with someone who had applied the “clear”. A cross-contamination defense. There are many who think he shouldn’t be allowed to compete in this Olympics.
If we want to keep our sport clean, we need to give credibility to the anti-doping regime. Gatlin’s claim was no more provable than Liz Palmer’s. They both were an attack on our drug testing regime. In my mind, both lacked credibility and we would have been better served by their silence.
LaShawn Merritt triggered three positive drug tests which resulted from his use of over-the-counter penis enhancement product containing DHEA (dehydroepiandrosterone) and pregnenolone. He issued a statement which said:
“As an athlete and strong advocate of fair competition, I have worked very hard to push myself to the outer limits of my physical abilities without any performance enhancement drugs.
“I’ve always prided myself on doing what’s right and will continue to do so. To know that I’ve tested positive as a result of a product that I used for personal reasons is extremely difficult to wrap my hands around.
“I hope my sponsors, family, friends and the sport itself will forgive me for making such a foolish, immature and egotistical mistake.
“Any penalty that I may receive for my action will not overshadow the embarrassment and humiliation that I feel inside.
“I am deeply sorry and hope that other athletes who take these types of over-the-counter products will be even more cautious and read the fine print, because if it can happen to me, it could happen to you.”
Merritt then shut up and served his suspension. His positive drug test and suspension wasn’t helpful to our sport’s image but at least he owned up to his offense in his statement about his positive test. His suspension is now part of the narrative of his career.
In Liz Palmer’s defense, she owned up to her offense and assisted USADA in adjudicating her case. She was rewarded with a six month reduction. Her statement made the mutually contradictory points that she had taken responsibility for the positive drug test and that she wasn’t really responsible due to some kind of contamination of her supplement.
From the outset of my comments, I have called for “tough love” toward those who test positive for banned supplements. We can love the athlete but not the offense. I mean no harm to Liz Palmer, who said she was going “dark” on social media. I assume she hasn’t followed the debate I started. I’ve seen a lot of love for Liz Palmer in the postings on this blog and elsewhere. I understand how my fellow athletes feel about her personally.
I would like to see the Masters Track and Field Committee have a discussion on drug testing for masters at December’s USATF Annual Meeting in Orlando. I’d like to have the masters committee set up an advisory committee to study the various issues which have come up in discussions here. Should drug testing take into account the fact that masters athletes are more likely to be taking prescribed medications on the banned substances list and should the rules for masters be different? In addition, we should study the use of supplements and provide guidance for our masters athletes. I hope to be there to participate.
Let’s take the energy stirred up by this controversy to make our sport better.
Steve Viegas - August 12, 2016
oops 1,440 word statement
Jerry Bookin-Weiner - August 12, 2016
This paragraph in #111 is one of the most significant statements made in this entire discussion:
“I would like to see the Masters Track and Field Committee have a discussion on drug testing for masters at December’s USATF Annual Meeting in Orlando. I’d like to have the masters committee set up an advisory committee to study the various issues which have come up in discussions here. Should drug testing take into account the fact that masters athletes are more likely to be taking prescribed medications on the banned substances list and should the rules for masters be different? In addition, we should study the use of supplements and provide guidance for our masters athletes. I hope to be there to participate.”
While I don’t think an intelligent discussion in the full committee at this stage is likely to be terribly enlightening, the idea of setting up a committee to study the entire issue has a tremendous amount of merit. IT is something I’ve been mulling over and think should either be done through a special task force appointed by our new chair (there will be an election in Orlando) or should be assigned to the existing Anti-Doping Committee which has limited its work to overseeing the drug testing that takes place by serving as the point of contact for USADA in a logistical sense only.
It is clear we will never reach total consensus on this issue – opinions are too diverse and strongly held for that – but careful study would be invaluable. Thank you for raising this Steve.
Steve Chantry - August 13, 2016
I don’t like getting into discussions about PEDs in our sport (or any sport for that matter) because it just frustrates me and depresses me. I have seen and heard too many young athletes respond to elite performances by others with, “he’s probably using something.” PEDs are destroying the motivation of our young athletes.
Regarding masters competition, for me it is quite simple: some of us age better than others. And although we may hope to compete forever, the reality is, we do age and things decline, break, malfunction or no longer heal. I take no supplements. I don’t even take vitamins. And with all of the focus on PEDs as well as all the uncontrolled garbage being promoted out there, it’s crazy to do so. I try to eat healthy -probably much more so than my college days when my body seemed to be able to effortlessly consume massive amounts of ice cream during the day and most likely too much beer and lack of sleep on the weekends. I trained hard back then and my coaches pushed me to get the best out of my body. Regardless of my life style it seemed, things didn’t break and continued to get faster and stronger. I was blessed.
In masters level track, I pushed my body the same way -it’s all I knew how to do. Those that know me well, know of my training regimen. When I stepped on the starting line, it was not how fast I hoped to race, it was how well I had been able to train that gave me both the confidence and the ability to succeed. I knew (or thought) no one in the world in my age group was training as hard as me.
And that brings me back to PEDs. PEDs let you train harder and/or get better/quicker results. At the masters level, when we are all fighting the natural decline, that is huge. I’ve had a good run the past 10-15 years. I’ve won two World Championships, probably 15-20 national championships and been on a number of World record and American record relay teams. But, I broke a couple of years ago and had Achilles surgery. My ortho said, “you will recover, but although you may have the cardiovascular system of a 30 year old, you still have a body of a 59 year old and recovery will be slow. And I can’t guarantee you will be as fast as you were before this surgery.” But I had no choice.
I am still trying to work hard, still trying to get my training to a level that will give me the “confidence and ability to succeed” when I step on the starting line. But, I have felt the aging process more than ever. I’ve had constant set backs. Constant sickness, injuries, joint problems, and other maladies. My time off of training due to surgery let my aging catch up. I’m still hopeful, but it’s hard. And no amount of supplements, drugs or PEDs will be used by me to alter that “aging” process to enhance my ability to compete. I’m sorry, but if it comes to that, then I (we all must) must walk away from my life as an immortal knowing I had a good run.
David E. Ortman (M63), Seattle, WA - August 14, 2016
Response to #100 “Pretty sure we’re ok with plain old vitamins.”
No, we are not o.k. with plain old vitamins.
Dietary supplement [and vitamin] manufacturers and distributors are not required to obtain approval from FDA before marketing dietary supplements. Before a firm markets a dietary supplement, the firm is responsible for ensuring that
the products it manufactures or distributes are safe
any claims made about the products are not false or misleading
the products comply with the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and FDA regulations in all other respects
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm194344.htm
Case in point: A JAMA Internal Medicine study (April 8, 2013) found extreme variability in dose among vitamin D supplements. Some pills had as little as 9 percent of the dose on the label, while others had up to 140 percent.
Think of a supplement store like going to a rave where someone you’ve never met is handing out colored pills. If you wouldn’t take unknown pills at a party, why would you purchase unknown supplements/vitamins? Vitamin supplements may be a medical need, but the bigger problem is how that industry continues to evade regulation.
tb - August 14, 2016
If I go to a rave, it’s not because I’m looking for vitamin D, that’s why I think I’m ok. Not getting the correct dosage is completely different than getting ‘contamination’.
By the way, I don’t check all my food sources for clenbuterol, either.
>tb - August 14, 2016
Really tb? Best to avoid raves. You’d better keep your head down or you’ll get banned just like Tom Cawley. He received a sanction a couple days ago from USADA but Tom got his without any test at all. Watch out – Big Brother is watching you, tb. Just like they kept an eye on Tom Cawley.
Ken Stone - August 15, 2016
USADA news release on M55 middle-distance runner Cawley:
http://www.usada.org/thomas-cawley-accepts-doping-sanction/
I’ll see if I can contact Tom.
http://www.mastersrankings.com/athlete-profile/?x2=Outdoor&x1=2014&x8=USA32464051THOMASCAWLEY
Larry Barnum - August 15, 2016
Liz Palmer is a good sprinter, hurdler, and a very creative story teller, fooling many of her friends and most of us on this blog. She’s likeable, so we wanna believe her, even if it’s not true! She tested positive for Dianabol, yet claims she’s innocent because, because, because. Because she had foot surgery in November, couldn’t have done “systematic doping,” “couldn’t train until the middle of January,” and “woman should never.” etc. She seems so convincing, yet maybe Liz doth protest too much!
According to google searches, why she supposedly couldn’t have used Dianabol, may be the very reasons why she did use it. When cheaters need a fast-acting, short-term PED, many choose “Dianabol 6.” Its 6-week “kick start” cycle “provides fast and significant gains early on.” (“Women” can “make good use of this steroid.” “Low dosages of 5-10mg a day over 4-6 weeks” provides “strength for most women, and reduces their risk of osteoporosis.” Long term,Anavar may be “a more women friendly steroid,” yetDianabol provides quicker gains.
After surgery and PT, Liz started running “the middle of January.” Yet, only a month later, February 14, she ran 60m in 8.66 and 9.93 60m hurdles! (Age-grading 97-98%!) On March 4-6, 2016, testing positive, her 8.50 60m and 9.82 60HH age-graded around 99-100%!
Dianabol “is so fast acting that effects are easily seen just after a few days.” Touted as the “feel-good” steroid, known for its “psychological and physical benefits,” it also helps in recovery and speed gains, so anyone unwittingly taking this PED, could quickly see something was very different! It was powerful enough to improve her times, yet she noticed nothing!
Most runners, after such fantastic improvements from “amino acids” would’a bought a caseload in February, had them tested, and not stopped before Nationals!
Coincidentally, if she followed the Dianabol 6 protocol, began the “kick start,” exactly when she started her sprint training and her “amino acids,” the six-week cycle would end 2 weeks before Nationals, or the very same time she supposedly stopped her “supplements.”
Liz tries to pass as an innocent victim, unfairly punished, but when you see her more clearly as deceptive and re-read her almost self-righteous letter, you might be able to see how easy it is for her to lie to us and to cheat herself.
JES - August 17, 2016
The Tom Cawley news is sad and embarrassing, as we are members of the same track club. I was chatting with several other club members during one of the rain delays at Jacksonville Nationals last year, and we wondered why Tom ran the National Senior Games in Minnesota rather than Jacksonville with the rest of us. From the Senior Games rule book: “The NSGA does not currently test for banned or performance enhancing drugs.” I guess we know why now.
Bill Daprano - August 17, 2016
This is a croc, We are a bunch of older athletes and it seems that some people think otherwise. Older athletes take supplements and medications. Why are we trying to act like a 20 year old?
bj425 - August 19, 2016
I am not an MD but I am in the medical field. One things stands out in the Palmer case: after reviewing her medical records and timeline of her surgery, USADA voluntarily spent thousands of dollars on supplement testing. This would not have happened without them believing the contamination claim had merit. There have been many postings of “expert opinions” from those who have no expertise, especially when considering they were not privy to the athlete’s medical records provided to USADA. So whose expert opinion do I trust: The one of USADA with its arsenal of chemists and attorneys reviewing medical records and other evidence, or the one of a marriage and family therapist like Mr. Barnum? That’s a no brainer. Speaking of opinions, did anyone read Barnum’s blistering condemnation of supplemental testosterone doping for older male athletes (the Pizza case?) Yeah, me neither.
Ken I’ve been a long-time reader but I’m sorry to say I’m quitting your site. A small group of posters have turned it into a cesspool.
Mr.X - August 20, 2016
There’s some good commentary here and then there’s the guy who keeps bringing up the FDA as if they’re not a huge federal bureaucracy whose #1 priority is maintaining and growing the power of the FDA. A Bureaucracy riddled with politics, special interest lobbying and careerism. BTW, and it’s already been brought up, most of the posters referring to “supplements” are not talking about illegal or even legal but WADA prohibited performance enhancers, so if “supplements’ is a dog whistle term for cheating to someone then that person just might be projecting a little bit.
Finally, those implying some kind of sexism in other posts need a reality check. The athlete herself, whose innocence or guilt I have no opinion on, played the gender card in her defense. Additionally, the previous poster claims that the USADA wouldn’t have “voluntarily spent thousands… without them believing the claim had merit.”…really?, perhaps the fact that the athlete is an apparently likeable female played a role in someone going the extra mile for her , because that’s never happened before, right? Perhaps it was professional curiousity, or combination of factors that made them decide to follow this particular case a little farther down the road. Maybe they did think it had merit but just couldn’t prove it. In any case, it’s not like the money came out of their own pocket or they weren’t getting paid for their time.
Larry Barnum just wrote what a lot of people were thinking as possible analysis of the athlete’s statement. Plenty of people beat up that Pizza guy too. A point by point rebuttal of the Barnum post and others would be more convincing to prove one’s own expertise than to imply a bias and in doing so display your own.
Larry Barnum - August 20, 2016
Gosh, I’m almost flattered somebody googled to see I’m a psychotherapist, (or that Steve Viegas is a lawyer), although, their time might’ve been better spent googling Dianabol. Well, if knowledge was their actual goal. Yet, just like Liz, they say, “No, no. Look over here.”
I’m not an expert, but ya don’t have to be to see Liz’s not telling the truth. Just re-read the easily googled Dianabol info quoted above that contradicts all of her excuses. Or look at her results.
1)Middle of January, began running and taking her “aminoacids.” 2)February 14, ran 60m in 8.66 and 9.93 60HH (Both age-graded97-98%!) 3)March 4-6, ran 60m in 8.50 and 9.82 60HH (Both age-graded99-100%!) 4)Mar 4-6, 2016, tested positive for anabolic steroid Dianabol.
Over the last 10 years, in different events, Liz consistently age-graded in the very good 91-93% range. Occasionally 94s. Yet, in the three week that she tested positive for performance enhancing drugs, she enhanced her performances to 97-100s%! While others legitimately score higher, without the use of steroids, yet maybe not Liz, calling into question earlier exceptions.
As a W45 from 2007 to 2010, her 60m times were clock-like 8.39-8.41s (Age-grading 90-94). But as a new W50, at 2011 Nationals, she somehow did 60m in a dubious 7.86 (102%), even beating Joy Upshaw by .11 seconds! She finished second in the 60HH in 9.63 to Joy’s 9.39. But in 2012, skipping Nationals, Liz ran 60m in 8.18 (99%) and 9.32 in the 60HH (100%) for a new American record. (This may confirm Rex Harvey’s view about previous records of steroid users.) By Worlds, she was back to the 93-94 range. (In February of 2015, she ran 8.49 60m, (98%) to win an age-graded cash prize, and a month later at Nationals 8.70.)
Sadly, Liz, the Russians, and other cheaters, ruin it for legitimately talented athletes, who now get questioned, their abilities doubted or marks dismissed. “Oh, everyone’s drugged. Even Masters and now the Special Olympics!” Or, on this blog, based on her misleading story, people now question their glucosamine! But this time, it’s really not about tainted “supplements,” quality of life medical issues, testosterone, or even the wisdom or efficacy of TUES; no, it’s about the intentional use of Dianabol, a performance enhancing steroid, and lying about it. Unfortunately, all too often, doubts and dismissals now become the real drug residue, tainting and contaminating our sport.
When I watch the Olympics or check the results from Masters track, I don’t wanna doubt the times or question the distance; I wanna celebrate the consistently amazing Bernard Lagat, or Myrle Mensey, Joy Upshaw and Kathy Bergen! I wanna honor almost every masters athlete in our sport. The fact that we do it at all, and some so amazingly well, injured or older, we’re still inspired and inspiring, the times and distances often wonderfully, legitimately mindboggling. Sadly, Liz as a American record holder, taints more than her own reputation but also the sport she seemed to love but has betrayed.
Peter L. Taylor - August 21, 2016
Unfortunately, Larry, you leave out some key facts.
You say that “…in 2012, skipping Nationals, Liz ran 60m in 8.18 (99%) and 9.32 in the 60HH (100%) for a new American record.” You fail to say that this was in Colorado Springs (altitude: 6035 feet).
Just look what was done at this year’s indoor nationals in Albuquerque (at altitude, of course). Ty Brown, a HURDLER, broke the world M70 record in the 60 dash, while in M65, Bill Collins (still suffering from the effects of Guillain-Barre syndrome) broke world marks in the 60 and 200.
Also at Albuquerque 2016 nationals, Joy, Liz, and Derek Pye broke American marks in the hurdles … Antwon Dussett in the 400, need I go on? Surely one must give great weight to the combination of a fast surface and running at altitude.
Note that all the 60 times in Albuquerque 2011 were thrown out, and so there is no need to discuss them. Oh, one more. You note that in 2015 Liz won an age-graded prize by running 8.49 in the 60, but you fail to give the location (from her competitive history and her personal Colorado connection I am guessing it was Colorado Springs). You then contrast that with 8.70 in nationals, which were in Winston-Salem, NC.
By your logic as expressed elsewhere, Liz would have tried to keep her “enhanced state” through 2015 nationals.
Coming back to 2016, you mention times of 8.66 and 9.93 in February, but you fail to give the site. I can essentially guarantee that they were at well above 1 mile above sea level (Colorado Springs), but I will check that later. Why was this information not given?
In conclusion, it has long been known that competing at altitude greatly improves performances in the sprints, hurdles, and long jump, but I did not see the word “altitude” appear even once in your discussion. Too bad.
tb - August 21, 2016
Re: 2015 and 2016, 8.66 and 9.93 were in Santa Ana, Pete. 8.49 was in Providence, RI.
Peter L. Taylor - August 21, 2016
Thanks for that, tb. My points about Colorado Springs and Albuquerque still hold, however. Note, for example, that we ran 2014 indoors in Boston. In the 60 dash, Ty Brown ran 8.46 in the trials and 8.81 in the finals there. Two years later, in Albuquerque, he ran 8.11.
In Boston, Steve Robbins ran 8.40 and then 8.38 in the 60 at age 71. Two years later, and no doubt much the worse for wear, he ran 8.27 in Albuquerque.
Why were races in Colorado Springs and Albuquerque used to illustrate “improvement by doping” without any reference whatsoever to the fast times that are normally run at these high-altitude sites?
Peter L. Taylor - August 21, 2016
One final point, and then I’m out, as I don’t want to do any further digging, prying into people’s personal lives, etc.
Turns out that this mysterious 2016 meet in Santa Ana was an outdoor event, and Liz had the wind at her back in both the dash and the hurdles. Hardly comparable to events run indoors. Would have been nice to know that when reading earlier posts.
bj425 - August 21, 2016
The last time we had such “expert opinions” based upon personal experience and internet research and not medical background and examination of medical records, as I assume Mr Barnum was not privy to Ms Palmers medical information, Jenny McCarthy was telling the world that vaccines cause autism. The problem with the internet is everyone thinks they are an expert. Which in Mr Barnum’s case they are not. I trust USADAs “expert opinion” far more than I trust Mr Barnums, and the fact is they found her claim had merit even though it could not be proved. End of discussion.
Herb Phillips - August 21, 2016
Change of heart bj425?
You have jumped back in your so called cesspool.
Or was it just one last dip?
bj425 - August 21, 2016
Herb, I wanted to check if Barnum had issued the same level of attack on Pizza as he did with Palmer, complete with flawed exhaustive research on past performances. Doping is doping, right? Or maybe not, depending upon what type and demographic. But since he didn’t I’ve drawn a conclusion as to why not. As for the rest of you, Herb included, thanks for exposing yourself as the crazy lunatic fringe. I’ll know who to avoid at future meets.
Mr.X - August 21, 2016
“But since he didn’t I’ve drawn a conclusion as to why not”…. ummmm…..a reasonable person might conclude that you STARTED with that conclusion and others based on YOUR identifying with a certain “demographic”. Your argument seems to rest solely on a couple quotes the athlete attributed to the USADA. To label people who might disagree with your reasonable but far from convincing defense as a “crazy lunatic fringe” tells readers more about yourself than you probably intended.
anonymous - August 21, 2016
All this yammering about the Palmer and Pizza cases, the digging up of age graded past performances, the bickering about cherry picking data, you guys are missing the forest for the trees. The real issue is the Cawley case which Ken said he would investigate. About 2 weeks ago M55 Tom Cawley was given a four year suspension by USADA for admitting PED usage and it was done without a drug test. How was evidence against Tom obtained? Were his constitutional rights violated in obtaining this evidence? That is a far bigger concern than middle aged men using testosterone and middle aged women taking supplements. Pull your heads out of your arses. This is major.
Mr.X - August 21, 2016
Hey killer, If and when Ken writes a column about your big concern everyone can weigh in on the THAT comment section. This thread is already struggling to stay on point. Any, and I mean any thread on any sports topic can have someone bring up the obvious fact that there are more important concerns (some even existential) than whatever’s being currently discussed….but thanks for pointing that out so eloquently.
Anonymousie - August 22, 2016
This thread has gone off the rails weeks ago.
Larry Barnum - August 22, 2016
Peter, you’re right. Altitude gives runners a clear advantage, yet even with that, most aren’t gonna break any records. Also, most PED users, even with their unfair advantage, aren’t quick enough to get a record. Since she’s no Joy Upshaw or Marie Kay, Liz needs something extra! Altitude and PEDs. So she combines them!
Protectively, you immediately “guess” or “essentially guarantee” that the suspicious times were at altitude, even when they weren’t. Good! You already see her obvious pattern of wanting that extra altitude advantage. Technically fair and legal. She set an AR at altitude. (But wasn’t tested) Yet she also tested positive at altitude! Some see that as no coincidence; altitude and PED’s as her only way to get a record.
Now we know that her AG range at altitude and positive PED is 99-100%! As you point out, the very same AG results at altitude at Albuquerque and Colorado! Hmm, yet you assume they’re different, “essentially guaranteeing” that a performance enhancing drug somehow wouldn’t enhance her performance!
Larry Barnum - August 22, 2016
Peter, Liz counts on you, trusts you, maybe confides in you, and expects you to remain loyal. To not even know the literature on Dianabol! To not even see for yourself, that there’s a 4-week cycle of low dosage Dianabol that’s specific to women. Or to not challenge or even see the flaws in the factually inaccurate “systematic timing” sequence. And if it’s all about her “medical records,” why’d she even mention something that’s so easily disproved? Because she can and no one calls her on it! Yet, if you see that she’s lied to you, fudged a little, she bets that your loyalty will cloud your judgment and provide justifications. And so far, she’s right!
Immediately defensive, you somehow trust that Liz had the “wind at her back” with her impressive 8.66, and besides, it was outdoors! Okay. But you don’t address how that was possible after only 4 weeks of training, and when 4 weeks later she tests positive! (And runs even faster indoors!) And, you didn’t mention, was also the second fastest time in the world, just behind Aussie Marie Kay, who ran 8.62, also with a 2.4 “wind at her back,” at her outdoors championships!
No, I’m not an expert, ya don’t have to be one either. Just read the literature. Or maybe explain why you haven’t.
Tom Sputo - August 22, 2016
Mr. Barnum, the shot did come from the grassy knoll, didn’t it?
Peter L. Taylor - August 23, 2016
Larry, I am not commenting, as noted earlier. Why this obsession with Liz, Larry? Perhaps you should see a psychotherapist. Personally, I have kept a clear head about these matters, which is more than I can say for you.
Peter L. Taylor - August 23, 2016
When, sir, did you stop beating your wife? You’re amazing, Larry. Why, Peter, did you not do this or that? Why did you not mention this or that? Here is what you are thinking, Peter, as if you could possibly know.
You have truly gone downhill, Larry. What a shame.
Tom Sputo - August 23, 2016
For the paranoid among us who think that USADA is stupid for believing in contaminated OTC products, here is another example; http://www.usada.org/kimberly-ciolli-accepts-doping-sanction/
Looks like this cycling athlete was hit for a product in a nasal decongestant (Propylhexedrine) which is available OTC. But AAS was also present in the tested sample.
The USADA report says that the OTC and prescription drugs were in therapeutic doses under the care of a physician.
So, for those who believe that the only things that may be contaminated are “Super Muscle Power”, it looks like something more mundane used under a doctor’s care was contaminated with AAS.
Read the attachment before you lose your minds.
Larry Barnum - August 23, 2016
Oops. Obviously, I’ve gone waay too far, Peter. That wasn’t my intention but sadly seems the result. So I’m sorry. Here I think I’m the one being marginally clear headed and intermittently rational but that’s not how it’s coming out, so I wanna pay attention to this. (Okay, reluctantly at first, and somewhat embarrassed.)
If someone I usually respect says ya need therapy and have gone downhill, well, that’s certainly not good to hear but also probably not good to have to say. Yet clearly and sadly, a wake-up. Again, I’m sorry for this misunderstanding.
Thames - August 23, 2016
You might want to re-read that, Tom.
Peter L. Taylor - August 23, 2016
Don’t worry about it, Larry (no. 142).
PLT
Tom Sputo - August 23, 2016
Thames, I have re-read the King’s English and I paste it here for you:
“After a thorough review of the case, including Ciolli’s medical records, USADA has accepted her explanation that the substances were contained within a prescription medication and an over-the-counter product she was taking in a therapeutic dose under the care of a qualified physician without the intent to enhance her athletic performance. However, Ciolli lacked a valid Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE).”
It says Substances (plural), which means that both the Propylhexedrine and the AAS was found in either the prescription medication or the OTC product that she was taking under the care of a qualified physician.
If this is not correct, then USADA needs to take further care in what they write. If this is what they intended to say, then my understanding is correct.
Scott Bickham - August 24, 2016
Re (#145 from Tom): I think what Thames means is that the release from the USADA does not say anything about it being a contaminant. Rather, they say to check the label of all medications you take, and I think that applies to both over-the-counter and prescribed.
A contaminant would not be on the label, so reading it would not do any good. But as we know, food products from China have a spotted past in terms of having contaminants. Just google “China food contamination.” While Liz could not definitely prove that it occured with her batch of dietary supplements, to me it’s a heck of a lot more probable that this was the case rather than that she intentionally took the banned substantances.
Tom Sputo - August 24, 2016
Scott,
I did research, and unless I am missing something, there is no ailment that would require prescribing an AAS to a female. Since the press release says that the 2 substances were taken under a physicians direction, that is what leads me to believe that there is a contamination issue involved.
Mr.X - August 24, 2016
A younger female gave an old man the time of day with a smile a couple of times and so the old man feels he needs to protect her. Classic Patriarchal soft sexism. I know no one on this thread would wan’t to be that guy, especially if that same person was to dress someone else down for their somewhat indelicate (but thought provoking) posts without actually countering their arguments.
Tom Sputo - August 24, 2016
Regarding medicine and Mr.X, perhaps someone is off theirs?
Mr.X - August 24, 2016
But you know who I’m referring to, right?. Additionally, a couple of posters on this board have made some pretty strong accusations in ref. to the motives of anyone questioning the athletes story. That’s a two way street. Which is what I was pointing out(whether my specific inference is true or not isn’t the point) in the post you replied to. Someone defending the athletes story might do a little introspection of their own. I’m thinking that because she could be innocent, a little courtesy and tact should be used (put yourself in her position) some people stepped over the line a little bit, BUT, that doesn’t mean they didn’t bring up some really good points. …..upon further review, I guess maybe I’m enjoying the back and forth on the thread at the expense of the athlete a little too much myself. Hmmmm.
Scott Bickham - August 25, 2016
Tom,
You are missing something. There is a condition called muscle dysmorphia which unfortunately could induce women to take AAS. I’m not saying this is what happened with the cyclist, but it is at least one reason a doctor might subscribe AAS. This is a good article on the topic, especially the dangers.
http://www.steroidabuse.com/steroids-and-women.html
Tom Sputo - August 25, 2016
Scott, a definition from an academic paper on this subject is, “Muscle Dysmorphia is a recently described psychiatric disorder, characterized by a
pathological preoccupation with muscle size.”
I seriously doubt that a responsible physician would prescribe any sort of AAS to a female in response to a patient wishing to “get bigger.” I also imagine that any prescription for testosterone for a female would be questioned by a pharmacist because while testosterone was formerly used during cancer treatment of females, it is an outmoded treatment.
Rusty - August 25, 2016
Reading more articles about the cyclist – she had a prescription for the steroid and was using an OTC inhaler. The USADA accepted both explanations but said she did not file a TUE for the prescription and the inhaler was fine outside of competition but not during the competition.
This comment thread has been an eye-opening experience. I had no idea so many people were into muscle building supplements. It has been fascinating to research the links people have provided and to find out how little regulations there are over the muscle building supplements. What was even more astounding was to see several studies that suggest that 18% to 25% of these OTC muscle buiding supplements may have banned substances that are not among the listed ingredients.
I can now see why the USADA and WADA say that athletes have strict liability for whatever is in their body. It is amazing that, if you take muscle building supplements that you can buy in a store and you get tested, you have possibly a 1 in 5 chance of testing positive for a banned substance.
My question is – if you are worried about drug testing, why take such an awfully big risk?
But then again, track doesn’t seem to have nearly as big a problem as cycling. In one article, a researcher conducted an anonymous survey of 4000 amateur cyclists, TEN percent admitted to using performance enhancing drugs (not OTC supplements) at some point in their AMATEUR careers.
Like I said, really fascinating reading – thanks everyone for the links.
Tom Sputo - August 26, 2016
Rusty, what is frustrating is that what has been officially reported regarding Ciolli’s only refers to “presence of an exogenous androgenic anabolic steroid and/or its metabolites”, whereas the stimulent in the inhaler was specifically listed by name. With Palmer, the AAS was specifically listed. My interest is not from a voyeuristic desire to delve into personal business, but if USADA truly whats to be open and prevent these type of things from happening, more specifics regarding what the drug was should have been provided so it could provide the “ah ha” moment for people.
David E. Ortman (M63), Seattle, WA - August 27, 2016
Perhaps this thread has “run” its course. But here is another example of the lengths that (para)athletes will go to gain an edge, even though the argument is that they are just restoring a natural level of body response. I must say, I’ve never heard of this until a radio news report today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boosting_(doping)
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/paralympic-games-spinal-cord-injuries-open-door-boosting/story?id=17127068
joe Johnson (61) - August 29, 2016
Right, the dog ate my homework too.
Ken Stone - September 30, 2016
Liz Palmer and other masters cases formally noted by IAAF:
https://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=b2ea082d-98b9-46a0-a8dc-8e79779cf205.pdf&urlslug=Doping%20sanctions%20-%20News%20176
Leave a Reply